The point is items have no integrity in the console version since characters are not secure on a server. Thus, it doesn't matter what they do, even if they allow people to hack items as a new feature. However, the PC version is on a server, so allowing trading will allow 3rd party sites to sell items and is against their "self-found" philosophy--these are not considerations on console. I don't necessarily agree with no trading, but allowing trading on PC and console are fundamentally different things.
-
- paralleluniverse
- Registered User
-
Member for 15 years, 9 months, and 16 days
Last active Sun, Sep, 6 2015 07:15:51
- 0 Followers
- 226 Total Posts
- 7 Thanks
-
Apr 12, 2014
paralleluniverse posted a message on Diablo 3 Character Optimizer, Diablo 3 Available On PS4 At PAX East, Joebo's Pet Doctor BuildPosted in: News -
Apr 12, 2014
paralleluniverse posted a message on Diablo 3 Character Optimizer, Diablo 3 Available On PS4 At PAX East, Joebo's Pet Doctor BuildPosted in: News
Console players also get to hack items into the game. It's so unfair that we can't hack items into the game on PC.
-
Jul 7, 2012
paralleluniverse posted a message on The Future of Item SellingOne year ago, we had this discussion...Posted in: News
This was before the announcement of the RMAH. The last post here was 20 July 2011. Coincidentally the RMAH was announced on 1 August 2011 (http://www.mmo-champ...eal-Life-Money!).
And now that Diablo 3 has been released, it seems I was wrong about Blizzard never supporting selling items for real money. But I've been absolutely correct about everything else, mainly on the fact that it destroys the whole point of playing the game.
As Kripp said what is the point of this game, when credit card warriors can just buy the best items in the game, and for what? What for? The game is pointless.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bdwQ5aXOStQ
And when Sixen, author of the thread, and the biggest Blizzard fanboy is criticizing the game lack of endgame, i.e. the lack of a point to this game, then you know that Blizzard has really fucked things up.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gZOzStdC9fA
So, one year on, I feel vindicated in being proved right that Diablo 3 has no point and RMAH makes the game pointless. -
Jul 18, 2011
paralleluniverse posted a message on The Future of Item SellingPosted in: News
Another excuse for not responding to my arguments that you can't counter.Quote from Nekrodrac
Are you like a freaking maniac or something?
Throughout this whole thing you are convinced that all or most players are on your side, along with blizzard. Yet you continue getting your panties in a mix over a hypothetical situation even though you are supposedly sure item selling store will never be in the game.
Like, I am 100% sure something won't ever happen but hey you know what, I will still rage about it. You've got some serious issues.
You jumped into the thread with that shitty attitude you know better than everybody when you simply don't.
None of my claims are false, you idiot. They cannot be- something you have yet to grasp. They are only for people to consider while you've been on this whole crusade about how you are absolutely right and I am wrong. There is plenty of messed-up material with what you've just written right now but I'll skip over it. I tried at one point in getting this deal level and explained a possibility, but dealing with maniacs become extremely boring after a while.
A Blizzard-run item and gear selling store will never happen, but that's not going to stop me from pointing out your erroneous claims. -
Jul 18, 2011
paralleluniverse posted a message on The Future of Item SellingPosted in: News
Yes, you have nothing to add because I have proved all your arguments wrong in those posts.Quote from Nekrodrac
True. I have nothing more to add. I have explained why I understand the option of item-selling store. Our point of views are based on entirely different assumptions about the game and the influence of the store.
You don't know if these rules will change or stay the same? Are you serious? Or just completely oblivious? Blizzard has always vigorously opposed selling items and gear at every single time point in the past, and at every possible chance they have to explain why they so strongly oppose selling items and gear. There is no possibility that this will ever change. Why don't you actually read some of the things Blizzard writes about selling items and gear? Then maybe you might understand why this will never change.Quote from NekrodracSomeone is spending cash earned in real-life to buy virtual items is something foolish in my eyes. Cheating? That depends on the rules. If you notice the thread title- it says 'Future of item selling'. Neither me nor you know whether these rules will change or remain the same.
Whether or not buying items and gear is popular (which is highly debatable since you have no evidence of how prevalent item buying is) doesn't change the fact that it is cheating. In a hypothetical future where it is allowed, the point of the game is completely destroyed. What's the point of trading when you'll just be beaten buy gear buyers? What's the point of collecting gear when you'll just be beaten by gear buyers? What's the point of PvP, when you'll just be beaten by gear buyers?Quote from NekrodracIn addition to referring to above reply, note that I've already given a few reasons why item selling/buying is actually so popular. The 'point' of the game does not change. The means do.
How is this question relevant in any way to the quote it's replying to? That is:Quote from Nekrodrac
Question- How do you detect bought items if these have been legitimately obtained?
"Trading takes a lot of negotiating and bargaining skills, and if you are not skilled enough to trade up to the rare items you want, then you do not deserve them. And Blizzard will rightly ban cheaters who buy and sell these items for real money. They will continue to do this in D3 because it is the right thing to do. Allowing cheaters to run rampant and to take no action, would destroy the integrity of the game, as it becomes a cesspool of cheaters. If your argument in support of cheating is: not everyone can have rare items, then my response is: too bad, learn to play."
The answer is, in the example where Blizzard sells gear, they will have a list of items they've sold.
I see that you've completely dodged the point by ignoring everything I've written, and asked an irrelevant question instead.
It's not relevant to anything. You're just throwing everything out there just to see what sticks, because you're not sophisticated enough to refine your thoughts.Quote from Nekrodrac
It is relevant when considering gamers' behavior in relation to rare items- the reason why I mentioned it at all. It's in context.
Your argument was that rare items are rare so that not everyone can get them. Then you randomly through out the completely irrelevant and unrelated fact that SoJs were duped. What has this got to do with rare items being rare?
And now you're saying that you talked about duped items because it related to the behavior of gamers. Why does this matter? Are you trying to say players will cheat to get rare items? If so, why didn't you just say exactly that? If players want to cheat, the correct response is not "I wonder why they cheat?" (Answer: to get an advantage over legitimate players) or "Let's sell gear because that's what they want", the correct response is Blizzard's response: Ban them.
Again, your lack of sophisticated thinking is showing. Blizzard isn't directly losing money because others are selling items and gear. Nor do they get money by closing down item and gear selling websites. Why doesn't Blizzard just open their own item and gear selling store, so that they can actually profit from it? Answer: because they are fundamentally against it.Quote from NekrodracBlizzard is sueing any item/gold sellers because the latter are making profit off their product. That's my take on this matter. Note that I'm not saying you are wrong but that I on the other hand very much doubt that Blizzard did this to promote the game instead of their profits.
Oh, so now you agree that Diablo 2 item buyers and sellers should be banned?Quote from Nekrodrac
Cheaters need to be banned. Yes.
The fact that spending real life money is a deterrent to buying gear doesn't help your argument, it hurts it. The more expensive the gear, the greater the deterrent to buy it, meaning that fewer players will have bought gear, and therefore the larger the gap between gear buyers and those who do not buy gear, i.e. gear buyers will be far better off and more powerful because they have better gear than a greater proportion of the playerbase.Quote from NekrodracThe presence of a blizzard store makes the buyers normal players.
1)Damage to the economy and item trading is impossible to assess until the game is in operation. My assumption: The consequence of spending real-life money will act as a major deterrent for many from buying from store, especially since items are freely available in-game.
I can see why you want to help gear buyers and the expense of everyone else.
Items that are bought from a Blizzard-run item and gear selling store, are created out of nothing. That necessarily implies an influx of items, popping into existence, out of nothing. Your assumption that players will not trade bought items has been pulled out of your ass, it is based on nothing.Quote from Nekrodrac3)If a person does not have the trading skills, they won't take this route and as you previously said, they do not even deserve that item which is on trade. Let's say that person goes to buy it in a store.
Another person who is skilled in trading comes along and gets your item(that person exists by virtue of assumption in (1). Now for that guy who bought his in a store with real-life money, the assumption that I make to determine his impact on future trading is that the spending of real-life money on that item will make said-person reluctant to part with it easily. Therefore trading won't be marred by a sudden influx of bought-items.
There is no point to trading, when gear buyers will have better items. Example: There is a gear store, but a player doesn't buy gear. This player wants to get a particular rare item that will make him better at PvP. The player trades items, until he eventually trades up to this rare item. Why should the player bother going through the effort of doing this since when he eventually gets this rare item, gear buyers will already have it, and other better items to beat him in PvP with?
In this example, the most effective way to be successful at the game is to buy gear instead of trading, bypassing one of the core activities of the game.
If you're not going to play the game the way it is designed and intended, within the rules of the game, which means no items and gear buying, then you deserve to get banned, because your actions hurt legitimate players. In the case where Blizzard is selling items and gear, there is no point to playing the game, there is no point to the game, because no matter what you do, unless you also buy gear, you will lose: the gear buyers will be better and more successful than you.Quote from NekrodracLet us stick to bought items and D3. I don't play SC2 nor heard of the maphack, so I have no idea what you are talking about here.
Those 'law-abiding' gamers are to me simply people who enjoy farming and have the time for it. It's convenient for them to play the game this way. If you want to elevate them on a pedestal for it, that's your own business. I think I've already addressed the point of 'cheaters'.
I'm not wrong. This is another example of you randomly spewing completely irrelevant things out. Let's go back to where this started: You said that if I wanted you to give examples of ways extra money can be used to improved the game, then you would have to wait to see what the state of the in-game economy is, in order to give those examples. This claim you made suggests that the state of the in-game economy is a relevant contributing factor to the content that gets developed for the game, not that there exists one mere example where the in-game economy was partially responsible for the development of content.Quote from NekrodracYou said there was no connection. I merely showed you one example where there was a connection. I'm not trying to win this argument but you were wrong there.
I can clearly see that you've never played any seriously competitive sports or games. In a competitive game, competitive players will do everything they are legally (or sometimes illegally) allowed, in order to win. The most competitive PvP players will be forced to buy gear to compete with other competitive PvP players. The most serious and competitive players will not be gimping themselves and be relying on skill alone, they will rely on both skill and gear, since others just as skilled as them will have bought gear to remain competitive.Quote from NekrodracFrom all the discussions on this board, most PvPers have prided themselves on their skill. While they have acknowledged the importance of items, I'm pretty sure D3 will have a wide range of that, so that the determinant of PvP will still primarily remain skill.
And you can't buy skill with money. I can easily imagine all true PvPers getting even more thrill from beating a guy who bought his items, since this community tends to look really highly upon challenging encounters.
In SC2, Korean professional tournament players don't say to themselves, "I will win with skill, and therefore not spend the money to hire a coach". They will spend the money to hire a coach, because other professional tournament players have coaches, and skill plus coach will give them a greater chance of winning than skill alone. Just as skill plus buying gear will give a greater chance of winning than skill alone. The most competitive PvP players would be obligated to buy gear, and the most successful PvP players will be gear buyers who just happen to be very skilled.
Here's the quote you were replying to when you called me a hypocrite:Quote from Nekrodrac
Hypocrite- a person who pretends to be what he is not
That's the definition I got. And yes, I understand the meaning and it definitely applies to you. Feel free to continue to pretend you can't comprehend.
"8) You've failed to grasp the fundamental difference between D2 and the D3 you're suggesting. D2 survived because item buying and selling is illegal. D3 will not survive if item and gear selling is legal, because it will have essentially no point when cheaters can simply buy the best gear for real life money, legally."
Where in that quote have I pretended to be something I'm not? In fact, where in this entire thread have I pretended to be something I'm not?
Let me give you a correct example of the usage of the word "hypocrite": If I were on the Blizzard web team, gleefully making those ads you can see on the WoW site to sell the sparkly pony mount for $20, then that would make me a hypocrite, given what I've written in this thread.
Again you're randomly throwing things out there.
I haven't arranged anything. You said: item selling didn't kill D2, so item selling won't kill D3. But item selling in D2 is NOT THE SAME as item selling in D3 (the hypothetical Blizzard-run item selling store). The effect of item selling in D2, says NOTHING about the effect of item selling in D3, because they are NOT THE SAME THING.Quote from NekrodracYou have simply arranged (1) and (2) for your own convenience.
Let me try-
(1) Item selling did not destroy D2.
(2) Item selling will not destroy D3.
Item selling can go with either-
(3) Item selling gives blizzard money
(4) Item selling gives black market money
Just the money going into different hands.
What you've written there makes no sense. Your (1) does NOT imply (2) because, they are different things.
No, it's not as simple as just money going into different hands, there are 2 fundamental differences you've failed to account for: Firstly, item selling in D2 just changes the owner of an already existing item, item selling in D3 (as hypothesized) will create an item out of nothing. Secondly, item selling in D2 is illegal, item selling in D3 (as hypothesized) will be legal. Therefore, they are different.
This causes far more complicated effects than simply money going into different hands.
Given that the best way to remain competitive with item buyers is to buy items, you're delusional if you can't see that item buying will become rampant, at least amongst the serious and competitive players.Quote from NekrodracI don't see buying items as becoming rampant for reasons already mentioned. Furthermore Blizzard cannot detect bought items as far as I know so they wouldn't have been able to take any action anyway.
In the case of a Blizzard-run item selling store, they CAN exactly tell what items have been bought. They created those items out of nothing, for the very purpose of letting them be bought. Are you so stupid you can't see this obvious fact?
It's not whether Blizzard can detect bought items that is important, it's the fact that Blizzard would create an item out of nothing, every time someone enters their credit card details, allowing these items to flood the economy at an uncontrollable rate. There is no feasible way to control the amount of items people buy, the same way one can control a drop rate.
You haven't explained anything. All you've done is suggest that people want to buy items so they should be able to, while throwing completely random and irrelevant statements and making objectively false claims about the effects of a Blizzard-run item and gear selling store.Quote from NekrodracI've already explained the rationale of stores and how they could work. I believe I have nothing more to add.
Your approach to this whole matter leaves much to be desired but understandable if you think the game will be unplayable should stores somehow be implemented.
I don't care what he, nor you, thinks of me. Especially since neither one of you have countered a single one of my arguments.Quote from NekrodracThat quote unfortunately makes Maka's assessment of you pretty accurate.
-
Jul 12, 2011
paralleluniverse posted a message on The Future of Item SellingPosted in: News
Beginning with an ad hominem, that's a good start to a rather sour post.Quote from makaTo paralleluniverse: you are obviously a kid or a very childish adult, that much is plain to see.
If you are in favor of vanity stores, we are not on the same side, we are mortal enemies.Quote from makaHell, I'm (technically) on your side of this argument, and I still tend to dislike your posts.
If you actually have something substantive and on-topic to say, then please do.Quote from makaThat's how much you suck at posting.
No one in this thread has given a good reason why it is better to sell vanity items, than to not sell vanity items.Quote from makaAll that dribble about vanity items affecting your enjoyment of the game and therefore being unfair to sell,
Look at the poll results, over 55% of the respondents on this website agree that there should be absolutely no store at all, including no vanity item store. One reason that has been commonly given in this thread, by myself and others, is that even vanity items are unfair. If you disagree with that argument, then why don't you make a counterargument.
Why do you think over 55% of respondents think there should be no store in D3?
Vanity items and visuals are synonymous in the sense that every visual can be made to be generated as a result of a vanity item. This is obvious, as vanity items are purely visual.Quote from makaplus that thing about "why don't we play with coloured cubes instead of armour", bla bla bla. I hoped I wouldn't have to tell you this, but: vanity items =/= visuals.
Consider a game, where the 5 classes appear as 5 differently colored cubes, and there exists a vanity item, that when acquired, changes the cube to appear as a normal looking character model. In this case, one can argue that this particular vanity item is not a core part of the game, therefore it is justifiable to charge $20 for it. It's only vanity, it doesn't affect gameplay in any way after all. Right?
This is the argument of "Vanity items do not affect gameplay and are not a core part of the game so it is acceptable to charge for it", taken to its logical extreme. Agreeing with this argument, necessarily implies agreeing with the example above.
Otherwise, you or Neckrodrac should refine your argument to "Vanity items do not affect gameplay and are not a core part of the game so it is acceptable to charge for it, as long as they do not drastically alter visuals to a point where I have arbitrarily decided that my enjoyment of the game would be hindered without it."
If it's so hilarious it shouldn't be difficult to come up with a counterargument.Quote from makaThe fact that you think it's "unfair" to sell something like that because it *might* affect your enjoyment of the game is hilarious.
Last I checked, D3 won't be free.Quote from makaI guess that, in theory, anything *might* affect your enjoyment of anything, so nothing should be sold, everything should be given.
However, if you would like to send a free copy my way, I'll be happy to accept it. And if you send a free copy to every player, I will concede my argument is erroneous, because then D3 really is "given".
A car is not a game. If you can't articulate your argument within the confines of the discussion, instead of appealing to an analogy that doesn't even fully apply, then you need to improve your exposition skills.Quote from makaHell, I'm gonna march right now to the car dealer down the street and tell him that it's unfair that he charges extra for those 22" rims! -
Jul 12, 2011
paralleluniverse posted a message on The Future of Item SellingPosted in: News
I didn't write those posts only so that you can understand them, although I would hope that the first step before replying is obviously understanding. I wrote them to show that you are wrong and so that people can argue against them, if they disagree with what I said. I see that you have nothing further to say or argue.Quote from NekrodracYou won't make a very good detective though. Your suspicions are crappy. I can reply to all of your so-called arguments but unlike you I have identified from where our perceptions differ and have thus explained to you why I can understand the rationale of a store. Of course I now know you do not have the ability to understand anything beyond your opinion.
The fact that you or anyone else are unable to obtain a rare item in a legitimate way, within the rules of the game you agree to when making a B.net account, doesn't give you the right to cheat in order to get them. Buying and selling items is cheating.Quote from NekrodracLOL!!!
You see, you can't understand anything. Rare items are RARE. That's how the game is designed which also means that only a minority will get them, however much trading there is. So what will happen to the rest, eh? Damn you are so clueless, it's pathetic. If trading was so easy, why would people ever want to spend real-life money on items? Make some sense already besides your cheating melodrama. Seriously, I'm starting to doubt you even have a brain, nevermind a functioning one.
And ya SOJs were all totally genuine. So much that people were selling them by the hundreds.
Your assertion people should be allowed to buy items because they are unable to legitimately obtain those items by trading is a direct endorsement for cheating. It is a complete antithesis to the whole point of the game.
Trading takes a lot of negotiating and bargaining skills, and if you are not skilled enough to trade up to the rare items you want, then you do not deserve them. And Blizzard will rightly ban cheaters who buy and sell these items for real money. They will continue to do this in D3 because it is the right thing to do. Allowing cheaters to run rampant and to take no action, would destroy the integrity of the game, as it becomes a cesspool of cheaters.
If your argument in support of cheating is: not everyone can have rare items, then my response is: too bad, learn to play.
Item duplication is completely irrelevant. It is a solved issue, no item has ever been duplicated in WoW.
Not only is it easy for me to say, it's easy for Blizzard to say too. Blizzard bans item and gold buyers, they ban maphackers, they sue item and gold sellers. They are correct to take this sort of action, because all of these examples undermine how the game is intended to be played. Not banning cheaters will give an unfair advantage to cheaters at the expense of legitimate players.Quote from NekrodracBe careful- you could overdose on excess self-rightenousness. Oh yeah blizzard, ban them! So easy- i mean in your fairy world it must be. I'm sure all the righteous gamers who spend their days farming/trading items instantly recongize duped or bought items and must feel all heart-broken and all.
Oh the tragedy!!!
You've also completely dodged the core of my argument, justifying why cheaters need to be banned:
1) Their actions damage the economy.
2) The people they buy from are scammers, hackers, and Chinese gold farmers.
3) They undermine the core of Diablo as an item trading game.
4) Legitimate players do not want to play amongst a cesspool of cheaters.
I've never claimed that cheaters are not having fun. But who is hurt? The fun they experience is derived from the unfair advantage they have over legitimate players, whether it's because they use a maphack to remove the fog of war in SC2, or because they win in PvP due to the items they have bought. In all these cases, their fun comes at the expense of legitimate and law-abiding players. Therefore, they should be banned, and Blizzard is of the same opinion.Quote from NekrodracIf playing the way the game is meant to be does not provide the most fun, players will find a way around. I am sure none of us skipped content here. I mean how could we possibly have done something so aweful(and against the game's philosophy) and yet enjoyed the game?
Impossible right? Oh man, seriously, get a clue.
Do you seriously think this is something that will ever be repeated again in D3? As I've already said, duplicating items is a solved issue. When's the last time Blizzard paid attention to the WoW in-game economy for anything? Never, because the in-game economy is a free market, players can do whatever they want. Do you know what actually motivates the development of content? Blizzard's development schedule, staffing, and priorities, not the in-game economy.Quote from NekrodracYa I know, selling SOJs and the appearance of Uber Diablo were PURELY coincidental.
I have no sympathy for cheaters, and don't be surprised if most legitimate players don't either. But most importantly, Blizzard has no sympathy for cheaters. They get banned.Quote from NekrodracSuch empathy warms my heart.
Then those who choose to spend the most real life money will be able to buy the best items, the most gold, the strongest PvP characters. Then the cheaters win, so I can see why this is an outcome you are in favor of.Quote from NekrodracCircumventing only for those choosing to do so. And there are good reasons for many to skip trading and some content(impossible to circumevent all content). I already mentioned that spending real life money for items that can be freely obtained will continue to be the deterrent for most people.
But I can also see why this is an outcome that Blizzard will do everything in their power to stop.
I suggest that you stop using words whose meaning you clearly don't understand. Your usage of the word "hypocrite" is completely out of context, it doesn't even apply here. How in any way does your response to what you quoted, even if it were true (which it isn't), show that I'm a hypocrite? Stick to using only words that you are capable of understanding.Quote from NekrodracYou are one incredible hypocrite.
Again your unsophisticated thinking is not able to grasp the issue here. In D2, items already obtained in the game are illegally sold, call this (1). In what you're suggesting, D3 should have a store where Blizzard legally sells items and gear, not already in possession of any particular player, for real money, call this (2). You claimed that (1) didn't kill D2, but how then does this imply that (2) will not kill D3, when (1) is not the same as (2)?Quote from NekrodracWhether it is legal or not, it's almost impossible to detect items that are bought, especially if they have been originally otained in a legit manner. So these stores will continue to EXIST. If the existence of such a store can't ruin a game, it can't ruin anything legal or not.
Your argument would be valid if (1) is exactly the same as (2), but they are different.
First difference: In (1), the transaction is illegal, and as a result legitimate players are not inclined to partake in such a sale. Only a small portion of players, cheaters, do this. In (2), the transaction is completely legal, so buying items can become rampant. The best way to remain competitive with item buyers is to buy even more items, since Blizzard will take no action against it.
Second difference: In (1) the item is already in the game so such a transaction is harder to detect. In (2) the item is created out of nothing, and Blizzard will have a record of the items they've sold. As a result, a large amount of items will flood the economy at an uncontrollable rate, as opposed to (1) where they are controlled by a drop rate.
I understand cheaters, I understand why they do what they do, why they destroy the game, why they need to be banned, and why Blizzard agrees and rightfully bans cheaters.Quote from NekrodracI have never cheated in D2- unless you count using mods in single player offline as cheating. But I try my best to understand all parties, something you are uncapable of.
The best you can do is label people apparently. Good luck with that.
If you have a valid argument why buying and selling items for real world money is not cheating, then please make it. Until then, I and many other players, are of the correct opinion that cheaters are a cancer that needs to be exterminated. -
Jul 9, 2011
paralleluniverse posted a message on The Future of Item SellingI want everyone to read Nekrodrac's post quoted here.Posted in: News
This is the most self-indulgent post, rationalizing the "legitimacy" of cheating, that I've ever read.Quote from Nekrodrac
Alrighty then. First of all I understand my magnificent sense of humor has been kind of off-putting to you. I do apologize.
As a result I will try to keep matters as formal as possible in this post. However I am afraid I will have to do you the discourtesy of not replying directly to what you posted. My excuse is that I have grasped much of your standpoint. So instead of going back and forth on how I am right and you are wrong, and vice-versa, I will try to explain to you my standpoint and why item-selling stores won't be the end of D3.
Before we proceed, let's consider this famous statement made by this famous person-
Half a game is defined as how the creators designed it and the other half how the players will approach it.
-Nekrodrac
Item selling has been around since D2 and it has been a reasonably successful and lucrative business albeit illegal. From here, we have identified that a market exists for this type of transaction.
Now while it is easy to jump the gun and cry- cheaters!, let's examine the following scenario-
This is entirely from my experience, though I'm hoping that when others read this, they will support this case with their own stories.
This is my gaming post patch 1.10 on D2 lord of destruction: I have leveled between 7-8 toons to level 75. I then proceeded to farm for the stone of jordan with ALL of these characters respectively. I seem to recall from reading a few guides that nightmare(?) Andy was the best boss. However I alternated between different best-farming places with at least 3 of these characters. Another point to note, one of the characters had over 700% MF while most of the others averaged 400%. I still managed to find and kill Andy in less than a minute. Between these characters I had totaled well over 200 runs.
Results- I have never obtained a stone of jordan though I collected a variety of other unique rings. It could be that I have just been really unlucky if not for the fact that I have heard a lot of similar stories. Then when duping came in and there were so many SOJs that the uber diablo event was created to address this issue, I understood that luck wasn't much of an issue here really.
Now the designers (and the very lucky players) of the game might argue that the rarity of an item is what makes it worthwhile to get which is an alright philosophy if people actually have the required patience to achieve this goal. The problem here is that inevitably only a small minority of (lucky!) players will legitimately acquire the rarest of items.
A good portion won't and it will not be due to their lack of skill or patience but that the roll of the dice simply didn't favor them.
So here we suddenly find ourselves in a position where skill verily doesn't count. And this is what causes players to turn towards a less direct way of obtaining items. For in their minds there is really no reason as to why they didn't obtain x and y items when they've spent the same amount of time as the guy who's showing off next door with all his gear.
This one of the ways how the market for item-selling eventually builds itself. Of course it is only part of it since there are people who simply view farming as an extremely unpleasant facet of the game and just want the gear that will maximize the power of their skills which will give them the thrill they are seeking. Yet another group sees PvP as their main way of having fun and going again through the process of farming to ready their characters becomes way too tedious and they look for the short-cut.
The thing is that all of this has been happening since D2 but it wasn't in the open. The point though is that players have created that market and it's a certainty that this market will be here in D3.
Some items in D3 are going to continue to be rare to keep the experience of finding one as exhilarating as it were in the previous games which will give rise to the situation(s) I described above.
Let us switch sides for a moment and see this whole matter from the game creators point of view-
We create a game. We tailor the experience of adventuring around looting and confronting monsters and other players.
And then-
We see that while we made all items (freely) available in-game, some of are actually going out of their way to buy them from third parties and they are making a decent amount of money too out of it.
So-
If that's how part of the player base wants to approach the game, why not give them the option and we make the money instead?
You'll see that I regard item-selling stores as more of a natural response from blizzard rather than contrived attempt at making more money.
I also wish to impress upon you another point- item-buying is unlikely to become rampant or out-of-control. I suspect the same group of people who bought items in D2 will be the ones buying gear for D3- that is those who can afford it and are willing to exchange time(spent farming) for money.
The other group (probably the majority of D3 players) will find money a very strong deterrent to acquiring items through the store when these are available freely in-game.
I mentioned in-game economy because that is the only thing in my eyes that can be truly affected and from which you can actually collect quantitative data to examine trends and results.
You mentioned soul, integrity, fairness of game all of which are abstract/subjective and arbitrary concepts that I unfortunately cannot relate to. So I was not trying to evade any of your points but rather bring it to a level where our arguments can be more objectively compared.
End note- Item selling has been here since D2. Some players want to play the game this way- whether you offer them this choice through legitimate means or not.
D2 survived. D3 will too whether those stores are official or illegal. The decision for how to acquire these items will be made within the same mind-frame in either case except that in the former one, the money goes to the company who created the game. And you've already shown you know how the game can be improved with more money.
Peace.
1) I suspect the reason you didn't directly reply to all of my points is partly because there are some for which you can't.
2) The legitimate way to get those rare drops after being continually screwed by the RNG is buy trading up to them.
3) If part of the playerbase wants to approach the game by buying items, Blizzard correctly bans them, because they are cheaters, their actions damage the economy, the people they buy from are scammers, hackers, and Chinese gold farmers, they undermine the core of Diablo as an item trading game, and because legitimate players do not want to play amongst a cesspool of cheaters.
4) Buying your way to the best items is cheating, it's not playing the game the way it is intended. Nor should it be the way the game is intended because striving for the best items by running content and trading is the core of Diablo gameplay.
5) You mentioned in-game economy in relation to Blizzard spending money on patching and developing content for the game. There is no connection. Blizzard doesn't gather data to see that the average price of a SOJ is 50,000 gold, and decides as a result of this that it's time to release a new dungeon, or make a patch to nerf the Wizard because she's overpowered, or open an item and gear selling store.
6) Yes, some people want to pay the game by buying and selling items, and those cheaters should all be banned.
7) The core and soul of Diablo is an loot and item trading game. Buying items circumvents the need to run content or trade, therefore it destroys the game.
8) You've failed to grasp the fundamental difference between D2 and the D3 you're suggesting. D2 survived because item buying and selling is illegal. D3 will not survive if item and gear selling is legal, because the game will have essentially no point when cheaters can simply buy the best gear for real life money, legally.
9) It is now apparent to me that you are a cheater, or at least a sympathizer of cheaters. Thus, I have no respect for you.
Jay Wilson, D3 lead designer, on the core of Diablo:
Jay Wilson: Well, Diablo, at its core is basically a trader's game. If you look at other types of progression based RPG games, World of Warcraft is a great example. In World of Warcraft the best items are you know, held by the raiders. In Diablo the best items are really held by the traders. You know those people that are really good at trading with other people. We have no intention of destroying that design or that group of players.
Source: http://www.diablowiki.net/BlizzCast_Episode_5 -
Jul 9, 2011
paralleluniverse posted a message on The Future of Item SellingNow onto vanity stores...Posted in: News
And how do you justify this absurd claim? If vanity items are not core to the game why are there armor designers, they could just release a game with 1 armor texture. By extension of this short-sighted claim, it would be perfectly acceptable if each of the 5 classes appeared as different color cubes, and we would have to buy a character model upgrade for $20.Quote from NekrodracI do not regard vanity items as core of the game.
End.
To claim that vanity items are not a core part of the game is brick-headed. Nearly everything you see in a game is vanity. Items and features that are purely vanity are offered freely as a core component of all Blizzard games.
You're shifting the goalpost from vanity items don't matter to vanity items aren't a core part of the game, because this is an argument you've clearly lost.
No. Even if vanity items are not a core part of the game my counter to your bad argument would still hold.Quote from NekrodracIt only fails if you see vanity items as core of the game and our views differ on this one.
You justified selling vanity items as acceptable because it doesn't have any affect in killing monsters, which is generally considered more important. And then you argued that vanity items don't make you enjoy the game more than useful gear.
I countered by saying that the enjoyment one gets from vanity items compare to useful gear is arbitrary and subjective (especially in the case of a negligible stat increase versus a look one may want). And selling vanity items is unacceptable because it is unfair that one must pay real life money to access vanity features that do affect the enjoyment of the game.
Where in the counter do I rely on the fact that vanity items are core to the game? Nowhere, I only claim that it has an affect on ones enjoyment of the game. Your comment that my argument falls apart if vanity items are not a core part of the game is simply false. Thus my counter holds.
Do you even read?
Blizzard could easily increase the price of D3 to $70 and the expansions to $50. I'm not saying they should do this, but how is it not feasible?Quote from NekrodracYou completely lost me on this one. You are not suggesting but you are saying hypothetically... Language barrier I fear.
Also you can't just randomly mention an idea if it is not even feasible which is I why I actually considered it as a possible alternative since our perceptions of fairness is different.
I've already explained above why vanity items are not extra. D2 and WC3 do not sell vanity items and vanity features, they are a core part of the game.Quote from Nekrodrac
Vanity is extra. Paying for extra is completely justifiable. Wanting extra for free is 'spoiled' to me.
D3 is not a free game.Quote from NekrodracWanting extra for free is 'spoiled' to me.
I suggest thinking before posting.
My statement that you were replying to is the following:Quote from NekrodracAlright let's talk a bit about this fairness business.
First of all I simply cannot stomach that notion of being 'forced' to get a vanity item if you want it. Just like the extra in a collector's edition that you have to pay more for, vanity items are the extra of the game. Should you feel you absolutely need it to enjoy the game, then you should pay for it.
I noticed that you have conveniently dodge the question. My statement still stands, it says "in order to get certain vanity items someone may want". Notice this preface, as it is key. It then says "that they be forced to pay for it through a store". Now if someone wants a vanity item from a store (again notice the preface, it starts with an "if"), is there any legal way for them to acquire this item without buying it from the store? No. Therefore, by definition, that person is forced to pay real life money if they want that item.Quote from paralleluniverseWhy would you prefer that in order to get certain vanity items someone may want, that they be forced to pay for it through a store, or go without it?
Collectors edition vanity items are almost as despicable, but they tend not to be as fancy or used as frequently as what is typically sold in vanity stores. Two wrongs don't make a right, so pointing to WoW and SC2 collector's edition doesn't justify anything.
And this is what is fundamentally unfair by definition. You should not be able to pay more to get more. Everyone should pay the same, even if it means that everyone has to pay more. As a result, everyone should get the same access to the entire feature set of the game, vanity or otherwise.Quote from paralleluniverseD3 is not real life but the financial model will be based on real-life applications. Like, if you are willing to pay more, you are entitled for more.
I've already justified why this should be the case: because D3 is a game and real life money shouldn't come into it beyond the price that everyone equally pays.
On the other hand, you've mostly been spouting nonsense throughout this thread with no justification at all.
Really? Why?Quote from paralleluniverseI partially agree with you that item-selling stores might probably have too much of a consequential disadvantage upon gameplay
Again you make a sweeping statement with no justification.Quote from paralleluniversebut as far as vanity items go, the whole playing field changes.
Obviously your perception will be different because of the importance you attribute to these, but understand that for some vanity is fluff and such a store generating revenue is hence perfectly alright.
Call it fluff all you want, the fact remains that it can affect ones enjoyment of the game, and it is unfair to charge additionally for it.
A higher game price or a subscription model is acceptable for reasons I've already explain in the above posts. These are superior revenue generating models because they do not cause the game to be unfair. -
Jul 9, 2011
paralleluniverse posted a message on The Future of Item SellingPosted in: News
So you're disagreement is either that a Blizzard-run item and gear selling store will not cause at least one of the points in the list below, or that the effect of all 6 of the below points will not cause D3 to be a shit game.Quote from NekrodracA shit game probably not. A good one, definitely yes.
1) It renders the main point of the game meaningless, that is acquiring and collecting gear.
2) It trivializes game content as one of the primary reasons to run content is for a chance of getting gear.
3) It delegitimizes PvP when a major contributor to winning or losing is the gear you've bought.
4) It destroys fairness because those who are willing to spend more real life money can get more gear in the game.
5) It destroys the sense of escapism that game should offer.
6) Some people who do not want to play a game ruined in this way will quit.
So which is it?
Your hypocrisy is laughable.Quote from NekrodracIsn't a subscription model much more suitable for MMORPGs that have considerable server costs? I really can't see how the expenses involved in D3 would warrant one-
Firstly, if we use your bad argument that Blizzard can use the money they made from their item and gear selling store to continue to make patches and support the game, why can't that same argument be applied for the money (or excess money) they obtain from a subscription model. The difference here is that making money with a subscription model won't destroy the game.
Secondly, you claim that a subscription model is associated with high server costs, yet you don't see how the "expenses involved in D3 would warrant one", which would imply that you know the expenses in making D3. But clearly you don't.
Thirdly, a subscription model is not an all or nothing affair. If $15 a month is excessive for D3, then they could go with, say, $3 a month.
We're still on the topic of a Blizzard-run item and gear selling store here, not a vanity store, as this is still a response to Sixen's post. Also, by definition, vanity stores would not be fair since players will have unequal access to vanity content dependent on whether they pay real life money for it our not. More on vanity stores in the next post.Quote from Nekrodracwhich is why I deem a simple vanity store to be fair(your favorite word) as a form of constant revenue and why a subscription-based system never crossed my mind.
I don't appreciate your humorless attempt at satire.Quote from NekrodracI don't know, man. I would love to think the poll is representative of what the majority of players feel about the whole thing but I haven't seen anything so far that would suggest that the people who voted constitute a normative sample. I might be totally wrong though and only 400 or so people are going to play D3.
I never claim that the poll is a representative sample, nor do I require it be to make my point. You said that:
And I agree that in the grand scheme of things, whether the game is worth playing for me is irrelevant, but the poll demonstrates that I'm not the only person who wants no stores at all, and a majority of respondents in this website, which constitutes probably the more devoted Diablo fanbase have the same opinion. A representative sample is not required for these mere inferences that I've made.Quote from NekrodracWhether it is worth playing to you is completely irrelevant since my point was that more money can lead to more improvements. And that's pretty much a fact.
Why does this matter? How is it relevant to the discussion.Quote from NekrodracAlso nobody knows the exact financial model D3 is going to be based on and the level of control the team has over it,
A game doesn't have to be a financial failure to be a failure. I will guarantee you that D3 will not have a Blizzard-run item and gear selling store, as Blizzard has always been unambiguously opposed to cheating and buying and selling gear for real world money. Blizzard has no plans to attempt financial suicide by introducing such a store.Quote from Nekrodracin the case of imminent failure as you have predicted should item-selling stores form part the game. Best bet is to wait and see I guess.
Therefore, my purpose has mainly been to convince you, and others, how idiotic your opinion is. -
Jul 9, 2011
paralleluniverse posted a message on The Future of Item SellingPosted in: NewsQuote from NekrodracAs for the possibility of the in-game economy being affected, I'm assuming the range of items offered in the store will be limited.
It is unclear why you've brought the in-game economy into this as it is not related to any of the points previously discussed.Quote from NekrodracI know that bit was nowhere in your argument but I'm just considering the different aspects of the game that can be hit by the presence of the store.
What is the purpose of this statement? Why are you even mentioning other illegal sites, and in what way is it related to the argument you are making?Quote from NekrodracOther illegal sites can profit from that
Not only is this statement completely irrelevant, it is also misleading. In what way do illegal sites profit from Blizzard running an item and gear selling store? By undercutting them? By selling items not available on the Blizzard store? Surely, these sites would be more profitable if they did not need to undercut or compete with Blizzard, in the instance where Blizzard has no store.
Blizzard is better off earning that revenue in a way that doesn't destroy the game, such as either increasing the price of the game, making more frequent expansions charged at a higher price, or using a subscription model.Quote from Nekrodracbut my point is that blizzard can earn substantial revenue from selling a good range of gear
You've also made no account of the fact that Blizzard would lose money from people who quit because their item and gear selling store has destroyed the game.
I find your analysis crude and simplistic, to the point of deceiving. Even if I were to accept your idea that only a limited range of items were sold from a Blizzard-run store, those items could then be sold for gold, up to the point where everyone who wants the item has it. This means that even selling only a limited range of items is equivalent to selling gold, and since gold is common currency, any item can be bought with gold at some price. Therefore, selling only a limited range of items is, in effect, selling all items.Quote from Nekrodracso that if ever buying items from the store becomes common-place, there will still be items in the game that will have a high fetching price, thereby not completely invalidating your farming efforts.
Do you even know what this statement means? I have no idea. Your language is imprecise and the meaning is completely ambiguous. Explain this statement, and then justify how you can claim it to be true.Quote from NekrodracSo I'm expecting the economy to adjust by itself.
No, those items are *already* in the game. Item selling websites won't be able to poop or clone items into existence.Quote from NekrodracThe way Sixen worded his post made me interpret it as there being a market out there for buying items with real-life money. And these items make it into the game.
If by "benefit from it", you mean destroy the game causing points (1) to (6) in my posts above, then yes.Quote from NekrodracWith a blizzard hosted store, that market will still exist but this time the game developers will benefit from it.
Why are you bringing "competitive prices" (whatever this is) into the discussion? In what way does it relate to your points, or the topic?Quote from NekrodracOf course, there's always the issue of competitive prices but that's a whole another matter.
You've completely missed the fundamental difference between D2 and a D3 that will hypothetically include a Blizzard-run item and gear selling store. Firstly, whether illegal item selling destroyed or harmed D2 is debatable. Secondly, and more importantly, selling items in D2 is against the ToS.Quote from NekrodracThey key difference is that this time, it's in the open and not a backyard deal. If D2 was not broken due to that, I find it an exaggeration to claim that D3 suddenly will be unplayable because of the store.
This is the fundamental difference. In legalizing this practice by opening a Blizzard-run item and gear selling store, players will be encourage to buy items, instead of getting banned for buying or selling items. The amount of damage that backroom deals did to D2 is thereby directly tied to the effectiveness of Blizzard's efforts to ban these cheaters. In contrast, if D3 had a Blizzard-run item selling store no action will be taken, and as a result it will waste the efforts of collecting gear, ruin the in-game economy, trivialize the game content, undermine fairness, and in general utterly destroy the game.
Rob Pardo on microtransactions:
"We've taken the approach that we want players to feel like it's a level playing field once they're in WoW."
"Outside resources don't play into it - no gold buying, etc. We take a hard line stance against it," he continued. "What you get out of micro-transactions is kind of the same thing and I think our player base would feel betrayed by it. I think that's something else you have to decide on up-front instead of implementing it later."
When it was suggested micro-transactions might make it easier for casual gamers to maintain pace with more serious players, Pardo said, "They aren't going to be the ones spending the money."
Source: http://www.escapistmagazine.com/news/view/81640-Blizzard-VP-Says-No-Micro-Transactions-for-World-of-Warcraft
-
Jul 9, 2011
paralleluniverse posted a message on The Future of Item SellingI want everyone to read this (which is why I've emphasized it):Posted in: News
This is precisely the problem. The utter unfairness and inequality in this is akin to cheating, in the sense that out of game resources are brought into the game, in order to give one an advantage in the game.Quote from NekrodracBecause not everyone is willing to consider spending real-life money as one of the variables to their approach to the game. You can see it this way- if you have time to farm and luck is on your side, you don't need to spend money. In the other case, you always have the option to spend cash and save yourself time.
Your argument is absolutely absurd and revolting. By your logic it is acceptable for players to use power-leveling services in WoW, because it is merely spending money to save time. Consider the fact that Blizzard is unambiguously against this, and will ban you if you use a power-leveling service or bot.
How is this in any way an advantage? The point of PvP is to compete with your character, in the gear that you've acquired, not the gear you've bought. This is the sort of nonsense that makes a mockery of PvP, particularly since a major contributor to winning or losing is gear, or as you suggest, the gear that you have bought.Quote from NekrodracOne possible advantage(I'm only speculating) is a faster way to build a PvP character.
Have you even thought this through? This idea is at worse forcing everyone to buy gear with real life money to be even competitive in PvP, and at best, asking casual players to buy gear with real life money before attempting to PvP. Who do you think you're helping here? This is the sort of ill-conceived nonsense that will make PvP have no legitimacy at all.
So you would have players buy their way to gear, rather than to earn it in-game and on an equal playing field like everyone else? If you or anyone is too lazy to play the game, within the constraints of the game, in order to acquire the gear to effectively PvP, then you do not deserve that gear.Quote from NekrodracYou can argue it will be unfair but the counter to this is that you won't get someone in the arena until you feel they are ready, independent of how they acquired their gear.
It is categorically unfair, by all sensible definitions of the word, to the person who has legitimately acquired this gear in-game that another player can simply buy that gear for real life money. In many ways, your position parallels an argument in support of cheating.
Consider the following idea: There is a "standard gear" arena option. When a game uses this option all classes are put into a standard set of gear, so that gear has no factor in the outcome of the battle.
Now lets evaluate this idea compared to your idea of selling gear for PvP. In what way is your idea superior to mine? None. You would destroy the essence of PvP competition to give Blizzard some more money, just as quickly as you would trade away the soul of this game for some extra patches. -
Jul 9, 2011
paralleluniverse posted a message on The Future of Item SellingPosted in: News
Don't be sarcastic with me. How did you get the idea that I think that games are made and supported by magic? How could you possibly come to this conclusion when I said that raising the price of the game is better than a Blizzard-run item and gear selling store?Quote from NekrodracHow do the latter come into existence? Magic? I doubt it.
It's well-known fact that it is usually gnomes and elves at blizzard who work tirelessly through the night, away from human eyes, to make it possible.
Blizzard already charges for the game. Better that they charge more for the game, or make more expansions that are charged at higher cost, or even use a subscription model like WoW, than to run their own item and gear selling store.
The reason for this is because, unlike a Blizzard-run item and gear selling store, charging a higher price or even implementing a subscription model doesn't destroy the game. It doesn't cause the following:
1) It renders the main point of the game meaningless, that is acquiring and collecting gear.
2) It trivializes game content as one of the primary reasons to run content is for a chance of getting gear.
3) It delegitimizes PvP when a major contributor to winning or losing is the gear you've bought.
4) It destroys fairness because those who are willing to spend more real life money can get more gear in the game.
5) It destroys the sense of escapism that game should offer.
6) Some people who do not want to play a game ruined in this way will quit.
A Blizzard-run item and gear selling store will do all of this to the game.
I don't appreciate your tasteless sarcasm.Quote from NekrodracMore money means
-that blizzard can now buy more candy for the gnomes and elves that are hired from Santa Claus to do the work
-and has also a stronger incentive to give us 'regular' updates.
I said it in my first post- this is not an automatic course of action but a probable one.
The effect of what you're suggesting is (1) to (6). What you want is to destroy the core and soul of the Diablo games merely for more patches. Patches are worthless when the game has been mangled beyond repair.
The integrity of the game is destroyed when the core of the game, collecting items, is trivialized and circumvented by people simply buying items for real money.Quote from NekrodracRegarding the store, it's not so much the integrity of the game at stake here but the integrity of the gamer as a person. -
Jul 9, 2011
paralleluniverse posted a message on The Future of Item SellingThere is so much nonsense in your post, that I have to point it out line-by-line, so I'll be taking several posts to respond to it fully.Posted in: News
Yes, I'm goddamn serious. This is what you said:Quote from NekrodracCome on now. Let's be serious for a moment. You want me to say what specifically more money can do to improve D3 with the presence of a store when I have never played the game?
And now you're telling me you cannot think of anything to back up that statement? Then why did you say it in the first place?Quote from NekrodracOh the irony.
You accuse someone of short-sightedness when you've shown that you are clearly unable to factor in how more money *can* lead to the improvement of D3?
I am not saying it will but you need to be pretty thick-skulled to be unable to grasp such a simple concept.
I've made the claim that no amount of money can fix D3 if there's a Blizzard-run item and gear selling store. I completely stand by this statement, and I've already given multiple reasons why this is the case.
1) It renders the main point of the game meaningless, that is acquiring and collecting gear.
2) It trivializes game content as one of the primary reasons to run content is for a chance of getting gear.
3) It delegitimizes PvP when a major contributor to winning or losing is the gear you've bought.
4) It destroys fairness because those who are willing to spend more real life money can get more gear in the game.
5) It destroys the sense of escapism that game should offer.
6) Some people who do not want to play a game ruined in this way will quit.
What the hell are you doing in this thread if you can't even think of a single point to counter my arguments?
How in any way is the in-game economy related to what we are discussing here? Are you suggesting that how Blizzard uses the profits from their item and gear selling store is dependent on the in-game economy?Quote from NekrodracIf that is what it takes to make my argument valid, we'll need to wait a couple of years after release, see how the in-game economy is fairing and then only will we be able to resume this discussion.
Do you know how much attention Blizzard pays to the in-game economy in WoW? None, because it's a free market.
You clearly have a problem writing a response that is relevant to the topic being discussed, and I will continue to point this out as I reply to your meandering post.
And here we have the generic response of more patches and content, with absolutely nothing about how patches and more content can possibly fix a Diablo game that has been utterly destroyed by a Blizzard-run item and gear selling store. Be more specific.Quote from NekrodracSince this is not a viable option, the next best thing is to be rational about the situation. What does a game need to be better? More frequent patches and content perhaps?
What will they patch in? What sort of content will they make? If your response is going to continue to be essentially "I don't know because the game isn't out yet", as you've done here, then don't even bother to reply. Why would you even make such a strong statement, when you don't know?
Now let me repeat to you, with examples, why no amount of content and patches will be able to fix D3 if there is a Blizzard-run item and gear selling store.
I've looked at the last time you quoted this statement, and I noticed that you still have not given a single counter to it. These are examples of things that can be patched in. And I've shown why it doesn't matter: because there's no point in patching a game destroyed by a Blizzard-run item and gear selling store.Quote from paralleluniverseWhat would they spend that money on? More PvP features such as ladders and tournaments? What legitimacy would this have when a significant contributor to winning or losing is the gear that you and others have bought? More dungeons and quests? What would be the point when you can just buy the gear anyway? To drag the lore out beyond the stories in the games already planned? At this point, D3 would have lost all legitimacy as a game and more importantly, as a form of escapism, because the items and gear you have can be determined by how much real life money you are willing to spend. It won't be a form of escapism, because at every frame we will be reminded that the items and gear of other players have been bought with real life money.
You stated that D2 is stale due to a lack of patches. The game is better off being stale than utterly destroyed by a Blizzard-run item and gear selling store. Better the game be stale, than to let players buy their way to gear, and thereby destroying one of the most important facets of the Diablo games, the items.
Stop saying more money from a Blizzard-run item and gear selling store is good for the game because Blizzard can use the money to make patches and content, unless you can actually back this up with something specific. Then I can tell you how delusional your idea is, because whatever is it that you think can be patched in won't matter when the core of the Diablo games is utterly trivialized, and by extension, ruined. -
Jul 6, 2011
paralleluniverse posted a message on The Future of Item SellingPosted in: News
You still haven't stated a valid way in which more money will lead to improvements to D3 such that it is worth playing, while an item and gear selling store is operating.Quote from Nekrodrac
Challenge? I dodged the stupidity yes, since I assumed you would actually make your brain work on your own. However that has been a large oversight on my behalf. I apologize.Quote from paralleluniverse
You've completely dodged the challenge in the quote.
Yes, the part of Sixen's post which I was replying to is about an item and gear selling store, not a vanity store.
Quote from Nekrodrac
Here's a quote from Ophion. Pointless for me to write it all up again- he explained it really well.Quote from paralleluniverse
No, I do not see how more money can possibly improve the game to the point it is worth playing, as long as an item-selling store is functioning, that is a store that sells useful items and gear. If you do, please enlighten us all.
You have 10 bucks. You can buy 3 cookies with it.Quote from Ophion
1. We pay Blizzard once, when we purchase the game. That money won't last forever if we want them to pay for servers, support staff and patches. If we want them to stay dedicated to this game and continuously work on it then they are going to need a steady income to compensate for their work. If no continuous stream of money is going to Blizzard, what will happen? They will eventually have to cut down on everything in order to minimize expenses, because otherwise they would start losing money. If a couple of million dollars are going to Blizzard every year from micro-transactions, then that is a couple of million dollars (- the cost to make more micro-transaction content) to be spent on patches, for example.
You have 20 bucks. Guess what? You can buy 6 cookies with it.
Holy cow! The miracle of more money. Now don't try to directly compare cookies with D3 (as I am sure you are dying to) but essentially more money allows for more work to be done on D3.
You seemed to have completely missed the point. What you're talking about is continued support and development for the game. But I've already shown in my previous post, with examples of possible additional content, (requoted below) that once there is an item selling store operating, why the game wouldn't even be worth playing, let alone supporting.
Quote from paralleluniverse
What would they spend that money on? More PvP features such as ladders and tournaments? What legitimacy would this have when a significant contributor to winning or losing is the gear that you and others have bought? More dungeons and quests? What would be the point when you can just buy the gear anyway? To drag the lore out beyond the stories in the games already planned? At this point, D3 would have lost all legitimacy as a game and more importantly, as a form of escapism, because the items and gear you have can be determined by how much real life money you are willing to spend. It won't be a form of escapism, because at every frame we will be reminded that the items and gear of other players have been bought with real life money.
Additionally, D2, WC3, and SC2 didn't need continued revenue from an item-selling store. If your concern is that Blizzard requires continued revenue in order to support Diablo 3 into the future, then why don't you suggest a subscription model? While a subscription model may not be as popular as a pay-once game, at least it doesn't cause the game to be unfair the same way an item-selling store will. At least, everyone will still have equal access to the same content and gear. Compared to an item-selling store, a subscription model is also the lesser of the two evils.
In summary, there's no point in supporting a shit game through additional dungeons, features, systems, and content.
You think I'm the only person who would not play a game that is trivialized by players buying gear off a store? Look at the poll result. My claim was not that more money will not lead to more improvements. My claim was that more money generated from an item selling store will not lead to improvements, because the very existence of an item selling store causes irreparable damage: "I do not see how more money can possibly improve the game to the point it is worth playing, as long as an item-selling store is functioning".Quote from Nekrodrac
Whether it is worth playing to you is completely irrelevant since my point was that more money can lead to more improvements. And that's pretty much a fact.
My post was directed at Sixen's news post (I even quoted it), in which he was clearly talking about an item and gear selling store, and not a vanity store, as he has a separate category for vanity stores. So why are you talking about vanity stores in a part of the discussion that is about an item and gear selling store? While the discussion of my response to Sixen's post is about an item and gear selling store, everything else is about selling vanity items.Quote from Nekrodrac
This is truly touching. I almost shed a tear.Quote from paralleluniverse
What would they spend that money on? More PvP features such as ladders and tournaments? What legitimacy would this have when a significant contributor to winning or losing is the gear that you and others have bought? More dungeons and quests? What would be the point when you can just buy the gear anyway? To drag the lore out beyond the stories in the games already planned? At this point, D3 would have lost all legitimacy as a game and more importantly, as a form of escapism, because the items and gear you have can be determined by how much real life money you are willing to spend. It won't be a form of escapism, because at every frame we will be reminded that the items and gear of other players have been bought with real life money.
Oh and I will completely disregard your little drama-queen act of item-selling store because it is quite clear in my post that I was referring to vanity ones that don't affect your character's power.
IF the store system works and generates money and that somehow D3 lasts as long as D2, more resources will be welcome.
D2 got stale- like real stale with the last patch having a 1 YEAR delay. I suspect the reason why there were even any patches at all was to keep the interest in the diablo series alive long enough for D3 to hit the scene.
Now for the store to continue working, such delays become a big no-no. In essence it's more power to customers- to be entitled to more regular updates.
It is also not clear to me why you've wrote this in response to what you've quoted, as it doesn't address or even relate to what is in the quote.
As I've stated before, there is no point in putting resources and money into a game that has been shitted on by an item selling store.
A game is not the same as a car. Vanity items are a core part of the game. They come with the game. It is not unusual for games to offer the entire feature set, all of the content, equally to everyone, in one transaction. This is how D2 and WC3 worked. Everyone buys the same game, everyone has the same access to all of the content, vanity or otherwise.Quote from Nekrodrac
Uhm no. If vanity items are not planned as being part of the original game, then no. It's pretty simple to understand.Quote from paralleluniverse
Yes, fairness. Fairness isn't about the fact that gear has greater "bragging value", fairness is related to everyone having equal access to the entire feature set of the game, that includes both gear and vanity items.
You buy a car. You are also expected to buy the extra tires if you want them. Vanity is extra. You don't need them to play the game or compete. What you are claiming here is not only illogical but senseless whining.
I'm not measuring anything for myself. I'm stating the obvious fact that people place different values on gear and vanity items, as measured by ones enjoyment of the game.Quote from Nekrodrac
You measure importance of gear as enjoyment of game? Ok. So, a vanity feature that doesn't allow you to kill any faster or better makes you enjoy the game more, when compared to what you experience with a useful gear, huh? I guess I simply can't relate.Quote from paralleluniverse
Despite that gear is usually considered more important than vanity items, it is still unfair, by definition, that players can have different levels of access to vanity items, depending on whether they buy it for real life money.
Furthermore, the importance of gear, compared to vanity items, measured by its effect on ones enjoyment of the game is ultimately subjective and arbitrary. And therefore, justifying selling vanity items as acceptable because gear is more important, as you seem to have done, fails because different players place different values on the importance of either.
While most people would derive greater enjoyment in the game from getting a best-in-slot item compared to dying their headpiece purple, others may derive more enjoyment from the game from dying their headpiece purple, compared to getting a weapon upgrade that amounted to +1 stamina.
And therefore, justifying selling vanity items as acceptable because gear is more important, as you seem to have done, fails because different players place different values on the importance of either.
I have one further point to add here. Just because it doesn't give an in-game advantage makes it OK?
What if you can pay to change your armor models to the coolest looking armor in the game (in a way that does not affect stats)?
What if you can pay to customize your character models like a MMO, while others can't?
The problem is not in-game advantage vs cosmetic rewards. The fundamental problem is fairness. For the game to be fair, everyone should have access the the same things in the game, cosmetic or not. Why should these two features only be available to those who bought it from a store?
I'm not even suggesting that Blizzard raise the price of D3, so I'm not sure why you came to the conclusion that the idea of predicting how much profit a store would generate would be unfeasible. I'm only saying hypothetically that raising the price is not as bad as any form of store, because it keeps the game fair.Quote from Nekrodrac
I completely disagree. Also do realize that what you are saying is almost impossible to do since you cannot predict how much stores would generate and therefore cannot adjust the game's value with respect to that.Quote from paralleluniverse
I never said that Blizzard should raise the price of the game. In fact, I hope that Blizzard does not raise the price of the game.
But raising the price of the game is better than selling items, and even better than selling only vanity items. It is the lesser of the two evils.
While raising the price of the game may make the game slightly less accessible in the short term, at least it keeps the game fair and equal for everyone. And because of this, it maintains the integrity of the game. Selling items, even vanity items, fundamentally undermines the notion of fairness that games should offer. Real life money should not factor into anything, as long as you've bought the game. Selling any items destroys fairness, and therefore raising the price, while unfavorable, is not as bad as this.
This is a far worse idea than stores. Just my opinion.
This was an argument to point out the importance of fairness in a game.
If you want that vanity item, and it was only available through a store, then there is no other way to have that item, therefore, by definition, you are forced to pay for it. There is no other way to legally acquire the item.Quote from Nekrodrac
No you wouldn't. End of story.Quote from paralleluniverse
The point I was making is that if you want to get the magenta headpiece, and it was only available from a store, then you would be forced to pay for it.
The very idea that you will feel forced to buy such an item is strongly indicative of a person's immaturity and spoiled-brat nature.
How is it "spoiled" to want everyone to have the same and equal access to all features of the game? It seems that it would be more "spoiled" for some players to get access to additional vanity items and customization features, just because they are willing to spend more real life money, as opposed to having all of this be obtainable by in-game means only.
This is an argument I've already debunked. Different players place different values on gear compared to vanity items as measured by their enjoyment of the game. I've even given 2 examples above. So it's unfair that some players can have unequal access to these vanity items. It's not always about ability to compete.Quote from Nekrodrac
My point is that that the relevant customization features still make the game playable with no effect to a character's power and ability to compete if vanity stores were present.Quote from paralleluniverse
Further, the existance of game mechanics like runes, which can be used to customize spell functionality, doesn't change my argument. Indeed, it isn't even relevant to my argument. That being, if there is any form of store at all, then players can pay more to access additional customization features, which is unfair and unequal. The observation that the game already includes customization features doesn't change this obvious fact.
Customization as eye-candy alone brings me back to an earlier point in my previous post- vanity items can't compete with a rare farmed one. So the real eye-candy remains non-vanity items, at least among the less-casual gamers of Diablo.
I called Sixen's argument as "moronic", I didn't directly call him a moron, this is different from what you've done. But this isn't related to the issues in this thread.Quote from Nekrodrac
Quote from paralleluniverse
Your only contribution to this thread is a bit of pseudo-logic and a lot of name calling. You really haven't offered anything substantive.
While selling gear, in comparison to selling vanity items, is more damaging to the game, any form of store at all damages the integrity of the game and undermines basic principles of fairness. Therefore, I maintain that there is no room for compromise.
I am AGAINST stores but to be so close-minded as you are being with the fairy tale stories(or pseudo logic if you prefer) of how your happy ending is all messed-up is laughable at best.
I thought you were ok with name-calling since your first post in the thread suggested you quite enjoyed it.
We differ on these so-called principles of fairness so while you are welcome to reply to me, this discussion is becoming circular.
Your arguments are based on abstract concepts like fairness, integrity and enjoyment (of game), all of which vary from person to person and simply cannot be really debated upon unless we agree on a universal definition. Something not likely to happen.
I'm not being close-minded, I have considered the implications of any store and have come to the conclusion that they are all bad. The concept of fairness is a simple one: that everyone has equal access to all features of the game. This is not a new definition, I've been saying it in my previous thread. What is your problem with this? Why would you prefer that in order to get certain vanity items someone may want, that they be forced to pay for it through a store, or go without it?
Ultimately, D3 is a game, it is not real life, and therefore the amount of real life money you are willing to spend, above the core game that everyone buys should not come into the equation, nor affect ones enjoyment of the game. That is why I've stated that the strongest argument against any store is because it destroys fairness.
- To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
0
A few points:
1. This isn't some "after the fact" rationalization which Zhaph claims it is. The quotes were from before when Blizzard decided to remove the RMAH, and some were from even before launch.
2. Medea294 is incorrect to say that everyone knew the RMAH was a bad idea except Jay Wilson. In fact, many people defended the RMAH and some of those people are quoted in the OP.
3. As for me not buying the game. That doesn't mean I don't know what's happening in the game. I still read and watch news. I didn't buy the game because of the RMAH. I would be a hypocrite if I did buy it. I didn't even buy the game when they announced the RMAH was being removed, I only bought it yesterday, AFTER it was removed for real.
0
The RMAH has been removed.
It was glaringly obvious from the very beginning that the RMAH, which legalized buying items and gold for real money, would destroy Diablo 3 and that it would make the game pointless. Yet Blizzard and the RMAH defenders, who have now proven to be utterly and irrefutably wrong, supported the RMAH by desperately clinging to debunked arguments, even as it was clear that the RMAH was ruining the game.
Many other people, including me, explained that they were wrong, but Blizzard and the RMAH defenders were too dense and arrogant to listen to reason.
Let's look at some of the totally WRONG arguments they wrote.
First, they said that the RMAH was made to combat third party sites by legalizing the buying of items for real money, which people were going to do anyway.
Blizzard:
L0ckless:
paroxysm2010:
dcemuser:
WRONG. Destroy the gold selling sites? What the RMAH accomplished was destroying the game. Of course, I told them that the notion that Blizzard should allow players to buy items for real money by legalizing and facilitating it because players were going to do it anyway is stupid because their dumb argument would imply that Blizzard should allow players to buy bots for real money by legalizing and facilitating it:
How did Blizzard and the RMAH defenders respond? They couldn't. They were not smart enough to think of a response. They had no response at all.
Legendaîry:
Next, they used the argument that it won't affect you if you don't use it.
Analysis:
WRONG. Even Blizzard has now rejected this completely wrong argument.
And even I told them that this argument, that the RMAH doesn't affect you if you don't use it, is completely bogus because the RMAH makes the whole game, all of it, pointless:
Then they said that the game won't be destroyed. We should just trust them on that?
Legendaîry (yet again):
Bashiok:
Herrow:
WRONG, again. It destroyed the game so badly that now even Blizzard has admitted their mistake and flipped-flop on the RMAH in an attempt to fix their mess. The RMAH has proven to be a catastrophic screw up of epic proportions, the most idiotic and foolish game design decision that Blizzard has ever made:
Even the Korean government agreed with me by banning the RMAH and banning the sale of all in-game items, citing the main reason why I hated the RMAH:
With the removal of the RMAH, Blizzard and the defenders of the RMAH have been proven to be wrong about everything on the RMAH and its effect on the game. They have no creditability left. Their wrongness destroyed the game.
If only Blizzard did not listen to these stupid and debunked arguments, Diablo 3 wouldn't have been so bad, received so much backlash, and be so completely pointless, as it has been since launch.
With the removal of the RMAH, Diablo is once again a game where buying items for real money is not legalized, where rich people cannot buy the best items for real money without risking a ban for violating the rules, just because they're rich enough to spend the money. The game is now more fair.
Equality of opportunity is restored.
Diablo 3 can look forward to a better future.
0
One year ago, we had this discussion...
This was before the announcement of the RMAH. The last post here was 20 July 2011. Coincidentally the RMAH was announced on 1 August 2011 (http://www.mmo-champ...eal-Life-Money!).
And now that Diablo 3 has been released, it seems I was wrong about Blizzard never supporting selling items for real money. But I've been absolutely correct about everything else, mainly on the fact that it destroys the whole point of playing the game.
As Kripp said what is the point of this game, when credit card warriors can just buy the best items in the game, and for what? What for? The game is pointless.
And when Sixen, author of the thread, and the biggest Blizzard fanboy is criticizing the game lack of endgame, i.e. the lack of a point to this game, then you know that Blizzard has really fucked things up.
So, one year on, I feel vindicated in being proved right that Diablo 3 has no point and RMAH makes the game pointless.
0
The AH was NOT accounted for in even the base drop rate.
"The drop rates were tuned for a player who would never use the Auction House. For the majority of internal development we didn't have an Auction House, we all played using our own drops only."
Therefore, now they're saying that they did NOT TONE DOWN base drop rates because of the AH's existence.
0
Diablo at this point is Team Rocket, blasting off again.
"I'll get you next time, Gadget, next time."
0
I didn't like how Diablo seemed to have killed Imperious and then he suddenly shows up at the door to the Crystal Arch as if nothing ever happened.
What happened to Leah was sad and a great tragedy. Bringing her back will just cheapen that.
The next expansion should focus on Malthael and his disappearance. An idea could be, after disappearing for 20 years to study the significance of the destruction of the worldstone, he concludes that the universe no longer has a point and so he wants to destroy all creation.
Another potential idea is to explore the power vacuum in hell left by Diablo's defeat. The idea of Inarius escaping his prison and coming back to reclaim his Sanctuary would also be cool.
0
A Blizzard-run item and gear selling store will never happen, but that's not going to stop me from pointing out your erroneous claims.
0
You don't know if these rules will change or stay the same? Are you serious? Or just completely oblivious? Blizzard has always vigorously opposed selling items and gear at every single time point in the past, and at every possible chance they have to explain why they so strongly oppose selling items and gear. There is no possibility that this will ever change. Why don't you actually read some of the things Blizzard writes about selling items and gear? Then maybe you might understand why this will never change.
Whether or not buying items and gear is popular (which is highly debatable since you have no evidence of how prevalent item buying is) doesn't change the fact that it is cheating. In a hypothetical future where it is allowed, the point of the game is completely destroyed. What's the point of trading when you'll just be beaten buy gear buyers? What's the point of collecting gear when you'll just be beaten by gear buyers? What's the point of PvP, when you'll just be beaten by gear buyers?
How is this question relevant in any way to the quote it's replying to? That is:
"Trading takes a lot of negotiating and bargaining skills, and if you are not skilled enough to trade up to the rare items you want, then you do not deserve them. And Blizzard will rightly ban cheaters who buy and sell these items for real money. They will continue to do this in D3 because it is the right thing to do. Allowing cheaters to run rampant and to take no action, would destroy the integrity of the game, as it becomes a cesspool of cheaters. If your argument in support of cheating is: not everyone can have rare items, then my response is: too bad, learn to play."
The answer is, in the example where Blizzard sells gear, they will have a list of items they've sold.
I see that you've completely dodged the point by ignoring everything I've written, and asked an irrelevant question instead.
It's not relevant to anything. You're just throwing everything out there just to see what sticks, because you're not sophisticated enough to refine your thoughts.
Your argument was that rare items are rare so that not everyone can get them. Then you randomly through out the completely irrelevant and unrelated fact that SoJs were duped. What has this got to do with rare items being rare?
And now you're saying that you talked about duped items because it related to the behavior of gamers. Why does this matter? Are you trying to say players will cheat to get rare items? If so, why didn't you just say exactly that? If players want to cheat, the correct response is not "I wonder why they cheat?" (Answer: to get an advantage over legitimate players) or "Let's sell gear because that's what they want", the correct response is Blizzard's response: Ban them.
Again, your lack of sophisticated thinking is showing. Blizzard isn't directly losing money because others are selling items and gear. Nor do they get money by closing down item and gear selling websites. Why doesn't Blizzard just open their own item and gear selling store, so that they can actually profit from it? Answer: because they are fundamentally against it.
Oh, so now you agree that Diablo 2 item buyers and sellers should be banned?
The fact that spending real life money is a deterrent to buying gear doesn't help your argument, it hurts it. The more expensive the gear, the greater the deterrent to buy it, meaning that fewer players will have bought gear, and therefore the larger the gap between gear buyers and those who do not buy gear, i.e. gear buyers will be far better off and more powerful because they have better gear than a greater proportion of the playerbase.
I can see why you want to help gear buyers and the expense of everyone else.
Items that are bought from a Blizzard-run item and gear selling store, are created out of nothing. That necessarily implies an influx of items, popping into existence, out of nothing. Your assumption that players will not trade bought items has been pulled out of your ass, it is based on nothing.
There is no point to trading, when gear buyers will have better items. Example: There is a gear store, but a player doesn't buy gear. This player wants to get a particular rare item that will make him better at PvP. The player trades items, until he eventually trades up to this rare item. Why should the player bother going through the effort of doing this since when he eventually gets this rare item, gear buyers will already have it, and other better items to beat him in PvP with?
In this example, the most effective way to be successful at the game is to buy gear instead of trading, bypassing one of the core activities of the game.
If you're not going to play the game the way it is designed and intended, within the rules of the game, which means no items and gear buying, then you deserve to get banned, because your actions hurt legitimate players. In the case where Blizzard is selling items and gear, there is no point to playing the game, there is no point to the game, because no matter what you do, unless you also buy gear, you will lose: the gear buyers will be better and more successful than you.
I'm not wrong. This is another example of you randomly spewing completely irrelevant things out. Let's go back to where this started: You said that if I wanted you to give examples of ways extra money can be used to improved the game, then you would have to wait to see what the state of the in-game economy is, in order to give those examples. This claim you made suggests that the state of the in-game economy is a relevant contributing factor to the content that gets developed for the game, not that there exists one mere example where the in-game economy was partially responsible for the development of content.
I can clearly see that you've never played any seriously competitive sports or games. In a competitive game, competitive players will do everything they are legally (or sometimes illegally) allowed, in order to win. The most competitive PvP players will be forced to buy gear to compete with other competitive PvP players. The most serious and competitive players will not be gimping themselves and be relying on skill alone, they will rely on both skill and gear, since others just as skilled as them will have bought gear to remain competitive.
In SC2, Korean professional tournament players don't say to themselves, "I will win with skill, and therefore not spend the money to hire a coach". They will spend the money to hire a coach, because other professional tournament players have coaches, and skill plus coach will give them a greater chance of winning than skill alone. Just as skill plus buying gear will give a greater chance of winning than skill alone. The most competitive PvP players would be obligated to buy gear, and the most successful PvP players will be gear buyers who just happen to be very skilled.
Here's the quote you were replying to when you called me a hypocrite:
"8) You've failed to grasp the fundamental difference between D2 and the D3 you're suggesting. D2 survived because item buying and selling is illegal. D3 will not survive if item and gear selling is legal, because it will have essentially no point when cheaters can simply buy the best gear for real life money, legally."
Where in that quote have I pretended to be something I'm not? In fact, where in this entire thread have I pretended to be something I'm not?
Let me give you a correct example of the usage of the word "hypocrite": If I were on the Blizzard web team, gleefully making those ads you can see on the WoW site to sell the sparkly pony mount for $20, then that would make me a hypocrite, given what I've written in this thread.
Again you're randomly throwing things out there.
I haven't arranged anything. You said: item selling didn't kill D2, so item selling won't kill D3. But item selling in D2 is NOT THE SAME as item selling in D3 (the hypothetical Blizzard-run item selling store). The effect of item selling in D2, says NOTHING about the effect of item selling in D3, because they are NOT THE SAME THING.
What you've written there makes no sense. Your (1) does NOT imply (2) because, they are different things.
No, it's not as simple as just money going into different hands, there are 2 fundamental differences you've failed to account for: Firstly, item selling in D2 just changes the owner of an already existing item, item selling in D3 (as hypothesized) will create an item out of nothing. Secondly, item selling in D2 is illegal, item selling in D3 (as hypothesized) will be legal. Therefore, they are different.
This causes far more complicated effects than simply money going into different hands.
Given that the best way to remain competitive with item buyers is to buy items, you're delusional if you can't see that item buying will become rampant, at least amongst the serious and competitive players.
In the case of a Blizzard-run item selling store, they CAN exactly tell what items have been bought. They created those items out of nothing, for the very purpose of letting them be bought. Are you so stupid you can't see this obvious fact?
It's not whether Blizzard can detect bought items that is important, it's the fact that Blizzard would create an item out of nothing, every time someone enters their credit card details, allowing these items to flood the economy at an uncontrollable rate. There is no feasible way to control the amount of items people buy, the same way one can control a drop rate.
You haven't explained anything. All you've done is suggest that people want to buy items so they should be able to, while throwing completely random and irrelevant statements and making objectively false claims about the effects of a Blizzard-run item and gear selling store.
I don't care what he, nor you, thinks of me. Especially since neither one of you have countered a single one of my arguments.
0
If you are in favor of vanity stores, we are not on the same side, we are mortal enemies.
If you actually have something substantive and on-topic to say, then please do.
No one in this thread has given a good reason why it is better to sell vanity items, than to not sell vanity items.
Look at the poll results, over 55% of the respondents on this website agree that there should be absolutely no store at all, including no vanity item store. One reason that has been commonly given in this thread, by myself and others, is that even vanity items are unfair. If you disagree with that argument, then why don't you make a counterargument.
Why do you think over 55% of respondents think there should be no store in D3?
Vanity items and visuals are synonymous in the sense that every visual can be made to be generated as a result of a vanity item. This is obvious, as vanity items are purely visual.
Consider a game, where the 5 classes appear as 5 differently colored cubes, and there exists a vanity item, that when acquired, changes the cube to appear as a normal looking character model. In this case, one can argue that this particular vanity item is not a core part of the game, therefore it is justifiable to charge $20 for it. It's only vanity, it doesn't affect gameplay in any way after all. Right?
This is the argument of "Vanity items do not affect gameplay and are not a core part of the game so it is acceptable to charge for it", taken to its logical extreme. Agreeing with this argument, necessarily implies agreeing with the example above.
Otherwise, you or Neckrodrac should refine your argument to "Vanity items do not affect gameplay and are not a core part of the game so it is acceptable to charge for it, as long as they do not drastically alter visuals to a point where I have arbitrarily decided that my enjoyment of the game would be hindered without it."
If it's so hilarious it shouldn't be difficult to come up with a counterargument.
Last I checked, D3 won't be free.
However, if you would like to send a free copy my way, I'll be happy to accept it. And if you send a free copy to every player, I will concede my argument is erroneous, because then D3 really is "given".
A car is not a game. If you can't articulate your argument within the confines of the discussion, instead of appealing to an analogy that doesn't even fully apply, then you need to improve your exposition skills.
0
The fact that you or anyone else are unable to obtain a rare item in a legitimate way, within the rules of the game you agree to when making a B.net account, doesn't give you the right to cheat in order to get them. Buying and selling items is cheating.
Your assertion people should be allowed to buy items because they are unable to legitimately obtain those items by trading is a direct endorsement for cheating. It is a complete antithesis to the whole point of the game.
Trading takes a lot of negotiating and bargaining skills, and if you are not skilled enough to trade up to the rare items you want, then you do not deserve them. And Blizzard will rightly ban cheaters who buy and sell these items for real money. They will continue to do this in D3 because it is the right thing to do. Allowing cheaters to run rampant and to take no action, would destroy the integrity of the game, as it becomes a cesspool of cheaters.
If your argument in support of cheating is: not everyone can have rare items, then my response is: too bad, learn to play.
Item duplication is completely irrelevant. It is a solved issue, no item has ever been duplicated in WoW.
Not only is it easy for me to say, it's easy for Blizzard to say too. Blizzard bans item and gold buyers, they ban maphackers, they sue item and gold sellers. They are correct to take this sort of action, because all of these examples undermine how the game is intended to be played. Not banning cheaters will give an unfair advantage to cheaters at the expense of legitimate players.
You've also completely dodged the core of my argument, justifying why cheaters need to be banned:
1) Their actions damage the economy.
2) The people they buy from are scammers, hackers, and Chinese gold farmers.
3) They undermine the core of Diablo as an item trading game.
4) Legitimate players do not want to play amongst a cesspool of cheaters.
I've never claimed that cheaters are not having fun. But who is hurt? The fun they experience is derived from the unfair advantage they have over legitimate players, whether it's because they use a maphack to remove the fog of war in SC2, or because they win in PvP due to the items they have bought. In all these cases, their fun comes at the expense of legitimate and law-abiding players. Therefore, they should be banned, and Blizzard is of the same opinion.
Do you seriously think this is something that will ever be repeated again in D3? As I've already said, duplicating items is a solved issue. When's the last time Blizzard paid attention to the WoW in-game economy for anything? Never, because the in-game economy is a free market, players can do whatever they want. Do you know what actually motivates the development of content? Blizzard's development schedule, staffing, and priorities, not the in-game economy.
I have no sympathy for cheaters, and don't be surprised if most legitimate players don't either. But most importantly, Blizzard has no sympathy for cheaters. They get banned.
Then those who choose to spend the most real life money will be able to buy the best items, the most gold, the strongest PvP characters. Then the cheaters win, so I can see why this is an outcome you are in favor of.
But I can also see why this is an outcome that Blizzard will do everything in their power to stop.
I suggest that you stop using words whose meaning you clearly don't understand. Your usage of the word "hypocrite" is completely out of context, it doesn't even apply here. How in any way does your response to what you quoted, even if it were true (which it isn't), show that I'm a hypocrite? Stick to using only words that you are capable of understanding.
Again your unsophisticated thinking is not able to grasp the issue here. In D2, items already obtained in the game are illegally sold, call this (1). In what you're suggesting, D3 should have a store where Blizzard legally sells items and gear, not already in possession of any particular player, for real money, call this (2). You claimed that (1) didn't kill D2, but how then does this imply that (2) will not kill D3, when (1) is not the same as (2)?
Your argument would be valid if (1) is exactly the same as (2), but they are different.
First difference: In (1), the transaction is illegal, and as a result legitimate players are not inclined to partake in such a sale. Only a small portion of players, cheaters, do this. In (2), the transaction is completely legal, so buying items can become rampant. The best way to remain competitive with item buyers is to buy even more items, since Blizzard will take no action against it.
Second difference: In (1) the item is already in the game so such a transaction is harder to detect. In (2) the item is created out of nothing, and Blizzard will have a record of the items they've sold. As a result, a large amount of items will flood the economy at an uncontrollable rate, as opposed to (1) where they are controlled by a drop rate.
I understand cheaters, I understand why they do what they do, why they destroy the game, why they need to be banned, and why Blizzard agrees and rightfully bans cheaters.
If you have a valid argument why buying and selling items for real world money is not cheating, then please make it. Until then, I and many other players, are of the correct opinion that cheaters are a cancer that needs to be exterminated.
1
This is the most self-indulgent post, rationalizing the "legitimacy" of cheating, that I've ever read.
1) I suspect the reason you didn't directly reply to all of my points is partly because there are some for which you can't.
2) The legitimate way to get those rare drops after being continually screwed by the RNG is buy trading up to them.
3) If part of the playerbase wants to approach the game by buying items, Blizzard correctly bans them, because they are cheaters, their actions damage the economy, the people they buy from are scammers, hackers, and Chinese gold farmers, they undermine the core of Diablo as an item trading game, and because legitimate players do not want to play amongst a cesspool of cheaters.
4) Buying your way to the best items is cheating, it's not playing the game the way it is intended. Nor should it be the way the game is intended because striving for the best items by running content and trading is the core of Diablo gameplay.
5) You mentioned in-game economy in relation to Blizzard spending money on patching and developing content for the game. There is no connection. Blizzard doesn't gather data to see that the average price of a SOJ is 50,000 gold, and decides as a result of this that it's time to release a new dungeon, or make a patch to nerf the Wizard because she's overpowered, or open an item and gear selling store.
6) Yes, some people want to pay the game by buying and selling items, and those cheaters should all be banned.
7) The core and soul of Diablo is an loot and item trading game. Buying items circumvents the need to run content or trade, therefore it destroys the game.
8) You've failed to grasp the fundamental difference between D2 and the D3 you're suggesting. D2 survived because item buying and selling is illegal. D3 will not survive if item and gear selling is legal, because the game will have essentially no point when cheaters can simply buy the best gear for real life money, legally.
9) It is now apparent to me that you are a cheater, or at least a sympathizer of cheaters. Thus, I have no respect for you.
Jay Wilson, D3 lead designer, on the core of Diablo:
0
And how do you justify this absurd claim? If vanity items are not core to the game why are there armor designers, they could just release a game with 1 armor texture. By extension of this short-sighted claim, it would be perfectly acceptable if each of the 5 classes appeared as different color cubes, and we would have to buy a character model upgrade for $20.
To claim that vanity items are not a core part of the game is brick-headed. Nearly everything you see in a game is vanity. Items and features that are purely vanity are offered freely as a core component of all Blizzard games.
You're shifting the goalpost from vanity items don't matter to vanity items aren't a core part of the game, because this is an argument you've clearly lost.
No. Even if vanity items are not a core part of the game my counter to your bad argument would still hold.
You justified selling vanity items as acceptable because it doesn't have any affect in killing monsters, which is generally considered more important. And then you argued that vanity items don't make you enjoy the game more than useful gear.
I countered by saying that the enjoyment one gets from vanity items compare to useful gear is arbitrary and subjective (especially in the case of a negligible stat increase versus a look one may want). And selling vanity items is unacceptable because it is unfair that one must pay real life money to access vanity features that do affect the enjoyment of the game.
Where in the counter do I rely on the fact that vanity items are core to the game? Nowhere, I only claim that it has an affect on ones enjoyment of the game. Your comment that my argument falls apart if vanity items are not a core part of the game is simply false. Thus my counter holds.
Do you even read?
Blizzard could easily increase the price of D3 to $70 and the expansions to $50. I'm not saying they should do this, but how is it not feasible?
I've already explained above why vanity items are not extra. D2 and WC3 do not sell vanity items and vanity features, they are a core part of the game.
D3 is not a free game.
I suggest thinking before posting.
My statement that you were replying to is the following:
I noticed that you have conveniently dodge the question. My statement still stands, it says "in order to get certain vanity items someone may want". Notice this preface, as it is key. It then says "that they be forced to pay for it through a store". Now if someone wants a vanity item from a store (again notice the preface, it starts with an "if"), is there any legal way for them to acquire this item without buying it from the store? No. Therefore, by definition, that person is forced to pay real life money if they want that item.
Collectors edition vanity items are almost as despicable, but they tend not to be as fancy or used as frequently as what is typically sold in vanity stores. Two wrongs don't make a right, so pointing to WoW and SC2 collector's edition doesn't justify anything.
And this is what is fundamentally unfair by definition. You should not be able to pay more to get more. Everyone should pay the same, even if it means that everyone has to pay more. As a result, everyone should get the same access to the entire feature set of the game, vanity or otherwise.
I've already justified why this should be the case: because D3 is a game and real life money shouldn't come into it beyond the price that everyone equally pays.
On the other hand, you've mostly been spouting nonsense throughout this thread with no justification at all.
Really? Why?
Again you make a sweeping statement with no justification.
Call it fluff all you want, the fact remains that it can affect ones enjoyment of the game, and it is unfair to charge additionally for it.
A higher game price or a subscription model is acceptable for reasons I've already explain in the above posts. These are superior revenue generating models because they do not cause the game to be unfair.
1
1) It renders the main point of the game meaningless, that is acquiring and collecting gear.
2) It trivializes game content as one of the primary reasons to run content is for a chance of getting gear.
3) It delegitimizes PvP when a major contributor to winning or losing is the gear you've bought.
4) It destroys fairness because those who are willing to spend more real life money can get more gear in the game.
5) It destroys the sense of escapism that game should offer.
6) Some people who do not want to play a game ruined in this way will quit.
So which is it?
Your hypocrisy is laughable.
Firstly, if we use your bad argument that Blizzard can use the money they made from their item and gear selling store to continue to make patches and support the game, why can't that same argument be applied for the money (or excess money) they obtain from a subscription model. The difference here is that making money with a subscription model won't destroy the game.
Secondly, you claim that a subscription model is associated with high server costs, yet you don't see how the "expenses involved in D3 would warrant one", which would imply that you know the expenses in making D3. But clearly you don't.
Thirdly, a subscription model is not an all or nothing affair. If $15 a month is excessive for D3, then they could go with, say, $3 a month.
We're still on the topic of a Blizzard-run item and gear selling store here, not a vanity store, as this is still a response to Sixen's post. Also, by definition, vanity stores would not be fair since players will have unequal access to vanity content dependent on whether they pay real life money for it our not. More on vanity stores in the next post.
I don't appreciate your humorless attempt at satire.
I never claim that the poll is a representative sample, nor do I require it be to make my point. You said that:
And I agree that in the grand scheme of things, whether the game is worth playing for me is irrelevant, but the poll demonstrates that I'm not the only person who wants no stores at all, and a majority of respondents in this website, which constitutes probably the more devoted Diablo fanbase have the same opinion. A representative sample is not required for these mere inferences that I've made.
Why does this matter? How is it relevant to the discussion.
A game doesn't have to be a financial failure to be a failure. I will guarantee you that D3 will not have a Blizzard-run item and gear selling store, as Blizzard has always been unambiguously opposed to cheating and buying and selling gear for real world money. Blizzard has no plans to attempt financial suicide by introducing such a store.
Therefore, my purpose has mainly been to convince you, and others, how idiotic your opinion is.
1
What is the purpose of this statement? Why are you even mentioning other illegal sites, and in what way is it related to the argument you are making?
Not only is this statement completely irrelevant, it is also misleading. In what way do illegal sites profit from Blizzard running an item and gear selling store? By undercutting them? By selling items not available on the Blizzard store? Surely, these sites would be more profitable if they did not need to undercut or compete with Blizzard, in the instance where Blizzard has no store.
Blizzard is better off earning that revenue in a way that doesn't destroy the game, such as either increasing the price of the game, making more frequent expansions charged at a higher price, or using a subscription model.
You've also made no account of the fact that Blizzard would lose money from people who quit because their item and gear selling store has destroyed the game.
I find your analysis crude and simplistic, to the point of deceiving. Even if I were to accept your idea that only a limited range of items were sold from a Blizzard-run store, those items could then be sold for gold, up to the point where everyone who wants the item has it. This means that even selling only a limited range of items is equivalent to selling gold, and since gold is common currency, any item can be bought with gold at some price. Therefore, selling only a limited range of items is, in effect, selling all items.
Do you even know what this statement means? I have no idea. Your language is imprecise and the meaning is completely ambiguous. Explain this statement, and then justify how you can claim it to be true.
No, those items are *already* in the game. Item selling websites won't be able to poop or clone items into existence.
If by "benefit from it", you mean destroy the game causing points (1) to (6) in my posts above, then yes.
Why are you bringing "competitive prices" (whatever this is) into the discussion? In what way does it relate to your points, or the topic?
You've completely missed the fundamental difference between D2 and a D3 that will hypothetically include a Blizzard-run item and gear selling store. Firstly, whether illegal item selling destroyed or harmed D2 is debatable. Secondly, and more importantly, selling items in D2 is against the ToS.
This is the fundamental difference. In legalizing this practice by opening a Blizzard-run item and gear selling store, players will be encourage to buy items, instead of getting banned for buying or selling items. The amount of damage that backroom deals did to D2 is thereby directly tied to the effectiveness of Blizzard's efforts to ban these cheaters. In contrast, if D3 had a Blizzard-run item selling store no action will be taken, and as a result it will waste the efforts of collecting gear, ruin the in-game economy, trivialize the game content, undermine fairness, and in general utterly destroy the game.
Rob Pardo on microtransactions:
1
This is precisely the problem. The utter unfairness and inequality in this is akin to cheating, in the sense that out of game resources are brought into the game, in order to give one an advantage in the game.
Your argument is absolutely absurd and revolting. By your logic it is acceptable for players to use power-leveling services in WoW, because it is merely spending money to save time. Consider the fact that Blizzard is unambiguously against this, and will ban you if you use a power-leveling service or bot.
How is this in any way an advantage? The point of PvP is to compete with your character, in the gear that you've acquired, not the gear you've bought. This is the sort of nonsense that makes a mockery of PvP, particularly since a major contributor to winning or losing is gear, or as you suggest, the gear that you have bought.
Have you even thought this through? This idea is at worse forcing everyone to buy gear with real life money to be even competitive in PvP, and at best, asking casual players to buy gear with real life money before attempting to PvP. Who do you think you're helping here? This is the sort of ill-conceived nonsense that will make PvP have no legitimacy at all.
So you would have players buy their way to gear, rather than to earn it in-game and on an equal playing field like everyone else? If you or anyone is too lazy to play the game, within the constraints of the game, in order to acquire the gear to effectively PvP, then you do not deserve that gear.
It is categorically unfair, by all sensible definitions of the word, to the person who has legitimately acquired this gear in-game that another player can simply buy that gear for real life money. In many ways, your position parallels an argument in support of cheating.
Consider the following idea: There is a "standard gear" arena option. When a game uses this option all classes are put into a standard set of gear, so that gear has no factor in the outcome of the battle.
Now lets evaluate this idea compared to your idea of selling gear for PvP. In what way is your idea superior to mine? None. You would destroy the essence of PvP competition to give Blizzard some more money, just as quickly as you would trade away the soul of this game for some extra patches.